Patents Technological Progress Globalized -Myassignmenthelp.Com

Question: Discuss About The Patents Technological Progress Globalized? Answer: Introducation Patent troll is an individual or entity that declares a patent aggressively against an entity or organization that offers a service or product. The patent troll in simple terms possess the patent and does not offer the product or produce the service represented in the patent. Patent trolls are also known as non-practicing entities. (Watkins, 2013). According to Google, patent market friction can be removed by buying patents to do away with patent trolls. This is a new technique that Google is trying, it is a good idea but it has been executed by the wrong people. Patent trolling has led to inconveniences to a lot of small businesses and people who had no resources to fight against patent trolls. Google being a profit business should not take itself as the body that will defeat patents from the global market and make the legal landscape more safe. Approximately 10,000 organizations have experienced legal charges by a patent troll, and patent trolls document around 84 percent of elaborate patent lawsuits annually. Patent troll cases have grown at an approximate of 500 percent within the past decade. Reporters generally write on patent troll lawsuits against known organizations, but startups companies are attacked frequently and the loss can be worse. Most businesses focused by patent trolls earn less than $10 million annually. (Ru?ther, 2012). Patents are intended to safeguard innovation. However, there is a growing perspective that the patent organization is being exploited to destroy what it was structured to safeguard. It is widely recognized that patent holding organizations are an essential part of the innovation community, as they aid in connecting manufacturers with innovators, therefore permitting innovators to focus on their best operations. (Takenaka, 2008) The operations by patent trolls influences high costs and innovation destruction. For instance, a Harvard Business Reviewarticlereveals that patent trolls charge defendant organization $29 billion annually directly out-of-pocket expenses; collectively, patent lawsuits destroys more than $60 billion in organization wealth annually. In addition, these charges fall unfairly on innovative organizations: the more research and development an organization performs, thelikelihood of persecution increase for patent violation, all else equal. (Matsuura, 2008). Patent standard are usually considered as a political and social issue. For instance, patents are not specifically noted in the standard guidelines for research. However, ethical matters relevant to patents are related to specific research body that create technology which may be fit for patent applications, for example, through collaboration with private firms that may contribute in research. In light of general pattern on research principles, like the general social roles, transparency and freedom of research, it is important that these analysts acknowledge the issues pertaining to patent ethics. (Stim, 2016). The biggest problem to both big and small companies doing the same business is the protection of intellectual property, that is, using assets and implementing ideas that belong to other institutions, companies and individuals. Knowledge offers intellectual capital which is very important and valuable to the business. Even though the bible states that you should not steal, stealing happens all over, both at local and international markets and at individual level more than we would accept it. (Waldeck Straus, 2009). According to Virtue Ethics individual character is emphasized as crucial element to ethical thinking rather than rules about the truth itself and their impacts. We ask ourselves is patent trolling is a virtue. Eudaimonism is theproportional understanding of Virtue Ethics. It suggests that living well with happiness is the main aspiration of any human being and this goal can be attained by utilizing the correct virtues to our everyday doings and exercising good judgment to antagonize rivalry that may arise. People consider patent trolling to be virtue that does not bring happiness because of the complexities around it. An action is considered right if a person considered to be good does it under the same circumstance. This theory is essential because human being get to criticize the character of a person than assessing the outcome of an action. This therefore, suggests that it is good to teach human beings a how to good than using rules and laws to punish them for their wrong doings. To be of importance, this theory should state a least set of features and behavior a human being should have in order to be considered virtuous. Patent trolling is an enemy to virtue. (Melden, 2013). Critics found the major problem of this theory to be the difficulty in getting the nature of the virtues. This is because people are different, live in different societies with varying believes and cultures and thus have different opinions on what makes up a virtue. However, proponents argued that any behavior defined as a virtue must be globally and universally accepted as a virtue for sll individual. Another limitation of this theory it is not guided by actions rather on traits a person should have in order to be regarded as a good person. This theory therefore, argues that someone who kills lacks many important virtues such as fairness and compassion among others. (MacKinnon, 2014). Contractarianism evaluates the character of a decision maker using set of structures that is clearly defined. The objective of this theory is to input guidelines and steps that will enhance decision making process of a person. Thus, contractarianism has been split to three basics, that is, moral hazard,adverse selection, and signaling. These basics create ways for individuals to utilize acceptable actions under certain conditions established in the contract. According to contractarianism, individuals are mainly focused on self-interest and the evaluation of the best strategy that will satisfy their self-interest will lead them to acting morally and to accept government authority. (Banks, 2013). According to critics any theory that is established upon historical contract is not valid because of the basis that and individual should not be constrained by the agreement of their ancestors. Others have argued that contractarianism cannot be taken to be legitimate because agreement is not without coercion or voluntarily because a government can use force against those people who object to enter into contract. TheMoral Theory of Contractarianism affirms that moral principles get their normative force form from the fact of mutual management. (LaFollette Persson, 2013). According Utilitarianism the rightfulness or wrongness is based on the consequences of selecting an action over others. It goes beyond the limitations of self-interests and considers others interest According to Mizzoni, (2010),this theory is based on some standards: Bentham's Principle of Utility: aims at recognition of essential responsibilities of sadness and happiness in the life of an individual and approve or disapprove a policy on the basis of happiness or sadness gained. It relates sadness with evil and happiness with good and suggests that sadness and happiness are measurable, therefore, can be quantified. Nevertheless, John Stuart Millsuggest that it isnt just about measurement of sadness and happiness but the quality of it that is essential in utilitarianism. Act-utilitarianism principle of utility employs precisely to each chosen alternative in a situation. It describes a right action to be the best result. According to critics, justification of immoral actions can happen.in this case we want to find out if patent trolling brings out the best result. (Reynolds, 2013). Rule-utilitarianism principle of utility is applied to discover the authenticity of a moral principle. Therefore, an action can be taken to be wrong or right depending on the adherence of the set principles. According to critics this principle can lead to development of unjust rules. For categorical imperative, a moral principle is that which is definite and unconditional for all people, and does not lean on any ulterior motive. For example, Thou shalt not kill, is categorical as different from the speculative imperative related to the need such as, if you want to be loved, do not kill. There existed only one categorical imperative for Kant, which he came up with in several ways which is Act only according to that maxim by which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law is a logical sentence and shows the condition of the logic of circumstances rather than morality. (Melden, 2013). Of all the ethical theories I believe Kants Categorical imperative because it is such a simple principle which a person can try to adhere to and improve his life and positively change his surroundings. My preferred version happens to be Act in such a way that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or in the person of another, always at the same time as an end and never simply as a means. Many individuals have put this in practice and it works all the time. (MacKinnon, 2014). What is going on? Patent troll is an individual or entity that declares a patent aggressively against an entity or organization that offers a service or product. The patent troll in simple terms possess the patent and does not offer the product or produce the service represented in the patent. Patent trolls are also known as non-practicing entities. Patents are intended to safeguard innovation. However, there is a growing perspective that the patent organization is being exploited to destroy what it was structured to safeguard. It is widely recognized that patent holding organizations are an essential part of the innovation community, as they aid in connecting manufacturers with innovators, therefore permitting innovators to focus on their best operations. What are the facts? Patent trolls utilize patents they purchased to gather license fees to fill their pocket. A patent trolls business structure is to transmit demand letters knowing organization cannot manage to appeal these questionable allegations Defense against a patent breach allegation can cost approximately $1 million. In 2011, organizations such as U.S. were charged with around $29 billion by patent trolls to cater for settlement cost and legal fees. Small and medium-size organizations are specifically affected by these cases. Groups targeted to gain positively from the patent system normally undergo suffering since it generates problems for them. In several occasions, it results to a system that administers a tax on innovators rather than aspiring innovation. What are the issues? Approximately 10,000 organizations have experienced legal charges by a patent troll, and patent trolls document around 84 percent of elaborate patent lawsuits annually. Patent troll cases have grown at an approximate of 500 percent within the past decade. Reporters generally write on patent troll lawsuits against known organizations, but startups companies are attacked frequently and the loss can be worse. Most businesses focused by patent trolls earn less than $10 million annually. Who is affected? Businesses like homebuilders, banks, hotels, credit unions, restaurants, realtors, convenience stores, and retailers. Trolls focus on common business equipment like restaurant and hotel Wi-Fi, ATMs, and office scanners/copiers. Rather than investing in more technologies or discoveries, Patent trolls utilize patents they purchased to gather license fees to fill their pocket. A patent trolls business structure is to transmit demand letters knowing organization cannot manage to appeal these questionable allegations. What are the ethical issues and implications? According to Virtue Ethics individual character is emphasized as crucial element to ethical thinking rather than rules about the truth itself and their impacts. Patent trolling is considered unethical because it tends to influence high costs and destruction of innovation. According Utilitarianism the rightfulness or wrongness is based on the consequences of selecting an action over others. It goes beyond the limitations of self-interests and considers others interest. Therefore, Patent trolls are taken to be illegal and unethical because their actions dont benefit the society and are of harm to people. Contractarianism evaluates the character of a decision maker using set of structures that is clearly defined. Individuals are mainly focused on self-interest and the evaluation of the best strategy that will satisfy their self-interest will lead them to acting morally and to accept government authority. For categorical imperative, a moral principle is that which is definite and unconditional for all people, and does not lean on any ulterior motive. What can be done about it? I recommend the following ways to deal with patent trolls: Keep cool and dont panic because this will make you handle the situation better. Expose the troll by doing intensive research. Trolls are only there for money and they wouldnt want to be exposed. Identify discrepancies in the patents, examine all the documents available to prove that the claims are not valid. Also it is important to team up with other individuals or organizations because its possible you are not the only target. This is of advantage because you can combine efforts and divide lawsuits costs. What options are there? Team Up with other individuals and organizations Identify loop holes in the patents Expose the troll by doing intensive research concerning the patent Which option is best and why? Teaming up with other individuals or organizations because its possible you are not the only target and you can combine efforts and divide lawsuits costs. References Banks, C. (2013).Criminal justice ethics: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications. Contreras, J. L., Jacob, M. (2017).Patent pledges: Global perspectives on patent law's private ordering frontier. Northampton, marketing: Edward Elgar Pub. Gao, X. , Song, W. , Peng, X. and Song, X. (2014) Technology Transferring Performance of Chinese Universities: Insights from Patent Licensing Data.Advances in Applied Sociology,4, 289-300. doi:10.4236/aasoci.2014.412032. Kageyama, K. (2016) Determining Inventive Step or Nonobviousness for a Patent Requirement in View of the Formation Process of an Invention.Beijing Law Review,7, 238-260. doi:10.4236/blr.2016.73023. LaFollette, H., Persson, I. (2013).The Blackwell guide to ethical theory. MacKinnon, B. (2014).Ethics: Theory and contemporary issues. Matsuura, J. H. (2008).Jefferson vs. the patent trolls: A populist vision of intellectual property rights. Charlottesville: University of Virginia Press. McDonagh, L. (2016).European patent litigation in the shadow of the unified patent court. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing. Melden, A. (2013).Ethical Theories. Read Books Ltd. Mizzoni, J. (2010).Ethics: The basics. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K: Wiley-Blackwell Ru?ther, F. (2012).Patent aggregating companies: Their strategies, activities and options for psychology companies. Stim, R. (2016).Patent, copyright trademark: An intellectual property desk reference. Berkeley, CA: Nolo. Takenaka, T. (2008).Patent law: A handbook of contemporary research. Cheltenham, U.K: Edward Elgar. Waldeck, . P. W., Straus, J. (2009).Patents and technological progress in a globalized world: Liber amicorum Joseph Straus. Berlin: Springer. Watkins, W. J. (2013).Patent trolls: Predatory litigation and the smothering of innovation.